Ford is watching You.

[Low Drag]

Just wondering if anyone else read the manual that came with the car. I noticed a small section that talked about the on board computer recording all sorts of data like throttle position, speed, braking, etc. Not quite sure how I feel about this at this point. Also if you notice in that same section, it tells you what that info. can be used for.

Just a thought, but if you have problems with the car and drive it hard, how hard would it be for them to use this to claim abuse and void a warranty claim? The other thing is that any information like this is subject to a court subpoena. Just one more thing for everyone to think about. If you like to go out and hook it up with guys at the stoplights and you happen to have an unfortunate incident, this data could really screw you in a criminal or civil court.

I can't say I advocate street racing, but I know everyone gets tempted once in a while. I'm also not trying to cry Big Brother about this. I just wanted to throw it out there and see what you all think about it.

[CANXLR8]

I thought that any car with a computer was recording that stuff anyway....
:confused:

[cobrajg]

As far as I am concerned. The car has a red line for rpms, a rev limiter and a speed limiter. I say take it up to the max all day long as that is what the car was design to handle. Why build a fast car if you don't want people to drive it fast and hard?

Like most computers, it has limited storage, storage that can be erased.

[rsnider]

One of the evening news shows had a segment of this subject. The topic being discussed was how lawyers were having the memory downloaded from cars involved in accidents. There was vehicle data that was helpfull to determine if the car had it's anti-loc brakes activated or not? I realy don't remember if vehicle speed was in memory... I think just throttle position, which realy would not indicate speed at the time of impact?

I do remember that the specific accident they were investigating only had a few seconds of data available for review.

[Walt]

Originally posted by Low Drag
The other thing is that any information like this is subject to a court subpoena. Just one more thing for everyone to think about. If you like to go out and hook it up with guys at the stoplights and you happen to have an unfortunate incident, this data could really screw you in a criminal or civil court.


I believe they all do this, since around the 1996 model year.

I have read that GM cars and trucks will "freeze" some of the data the computer constantly collects, like that of the vehicle's speed, steering wheel position, brake pedal position, gas pedal position, etc, whenever the air bags are deployed. Also, GM still start to distribute to police units this fall, a device which will read this data back out in order to aid in accident investigation.

[rsnider]

Not to defend infringements on personal rights but... if you are street racing and cause an accidnet it isn't like the data on the cars computer is the only thing you have to worry about. If the computer disputes the lies you are telling the police, how is that a problem Ford, GM, or Dodge needs to address? I like the performance my car affords me, but if I do something realy stupid... it isn't my cars fault?

[Julio]

Most of what the Manufacturers are doing is to protect themselves from lawsuits, I personally was involved in a case on a Windstar van, the owner claimed the brakes failed when he hit another vehicle and was suing Ford, to make a long story short, The van, the owner and his lawyer, and a Ford field service engineer and a Ford Lawyer were there, the FSE pulled the infomation up showing that the brakes indeed did not fail, the dude had to drop the lawsuit right there... Justice if you ask me. Alot of people today wont take resposibility for their actions and would rather sue you butt...

[rsnider]

I wish this data had been available when people were driving through the back of their garage claiming that the harder they pushed on the brake, the faster the car went! We probably would not have to endure all the anoying safety devices on the brake and shifters.

[Walt]

Originally posted by rsnider
I wish this data had been available when people were driving through the back of their garage claiming that the harder they pushed on the brake, the faster the car went! We probably would not have to endure all the anoying safety devices on the brake and shifters.

I hate to even bring this up, but something like this happen to me, though I didn't hit anything.

When you are 100% sure that your foot is on the brake pedal, in that split second you need to figure out something to do because the car is moving faster, moving your foot to the other pedal isn't something that pops into your mind. When you are sure your boot is on the brake, and you need to stop the car, the first thing that pops into your mind is to press harder. Add a level of panic into the equation, and you are even more sure your foot is on the brake pedal.

At least for me, it happen because I wasn't sitting straight in the driver's seat, and my feet became disoriented. I moved my right foot to the left, and instinctively thought that the pedal to the left was the brake. It wasn't; it was the gas.

However, afterward I knew exactly what I had done wrong.
It was me and not the car's fault.

[rsnider]

That's what you get for trying to make-out while the car is running! I'm glad you responded... it was an explination I hadn't thought of? The brake release for the shifter will help avoid accidents even if it is the drivers fault... and maybe keep an unexpected garage remodel from being necessary.

[Jc'S MaCh 1]

I am not worried. They can collect all the stuff they want from me and my driving style. Whatever they can use against you at any point intime, just might save you from a big repair bill

If I have a problem about driving hard. I will just bring in my flyer and poster of the Mach 1 doing a burn out, then I will wait for their explanation as to what I did that might be worst then what the picture is displaying. ;)

Jc

[wdwrdcrzr]

I only drive the car the way it was intended to be driven.As advertised 305 horses of pavement pounding power.If that 150 mph speedo isnt calling your name then you bought the wrong car.

[Low Drag]

Thanks for all the replies. You guys definitely changed my perspective on this a little. I never really thought about it as being something that could help you out instead of just cause you troubles.

[1mach03]

Smile were on candid camera. April Zavela the vettelady.:D :D :D

['70 Vert]

Old news.
Cars have been able to do this since the '90's.
German cars even longer ago.

If I was worried about it, I'd be driving a Toyota Camry or some other plain, white bread vehicle.

The MACH 1 is a performance car. Drive it like one and be happy!:D

[AZDave]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by '70 Vert
[B]Old news.
Cars have been able to do this since the '90's.
German cars even longer ago.

This reminds me of a funny thing I witnessed back in the mid 90’s. I was picking up my wife’s 325 from the dealer after a routine service. There was a guy arguing with the service advisor about the blown engine in his M3. He claimed it just blew up. They were able to tell him about retrieving the max RPM recorded in the ECM. That’s when he remembered shifting into 2nd instead of 4th by mistake right before it stopped running.
Darn shifter.:D

[chick's_stang]

It wasn't me doing 150. Dealer must have taken it out for a joy ride. Or maybe it came from the miles on the car before delivery. Does anyone know exactly what is recorded, time, date, and why haven't I ever heard of this before?

[falcongtho3]

There are desires to put aircraft style 'black boxes' in cars that will hold in an electronic memory the minutes before an accident. The insurance companies want them, the car companies want them. Those tasked with protecting our rights and freedoms don't want them. We'll have to pay for them, pay for their replacements, and answer to their statements on the state of the vehicle in such situations. Adding this to the Big Brother-ish OBD V that can pretty much give a history on how you've treated your car, what mods you've made and the possibility of outside intrusion into your vehicles electronic systems by remote and it almost gives one a reason to be paranoid!

[Unit 5302]

The real problem behind this is monitoring these systems are eventually capable of. Just like the man who was issued a speeding ticket after returning a car to the rental agency and they downloaded the information and reported him to the police.

It would take very little modification to build in a system through a GPS to track your car's position and speed at all times. From that it could simply report back to a police system, and you could be issued tickets without ever seeing an officer.

Concepts such as police "scanners" to read the data are being dreamed up as well. Imagine being pulled over simply because a police officer doesn't like your Ford (this does occationally happen, btw). All he'd have to do is scan the computer real quick, and find something you did wrong.

While I don't have a problem with these devices being used for accident data gathering or tracking stolen cars with GPS's, I do have a very real problem with them being used in everyday circumstances. It just paves the way for increased monitoring in our society as a whole. Once you're accustomed to increased scruitiny, you're more willing to accept further invations as being fairly "normal."

Case in point, the state of IL just passed a law declaring all (computer) firewall's illegal. It was brought about by the RIAA wanting to track down people who might be downloading music for prosecution, but the wording creates havok if enforced. All businesses would have to remove their information safeguards, which would obviously drastically increase hacking and other problems. It's just one more step in the wrong direction, in my honest opinion.

[falcongtho3]

Some of the more exotic cars out there now, Ferrari and one of the others that for now escapes me, have an onboard system that have a tie-in between the cars engine computer and on board cell phone system. The engines on board dignosis system can call up to a preset number, or the number can be called in to from the factory. This is supposed to be a way to diagnose any engine problems, but I am quite sure that there is much more information that can be gleaned from this type of system. (The oher company might be Aston Martin...no, that would be a Ford product...hmm...)

[Unit 5302]

With a Ferrari, I think they kind of expect you to drive it like you want to. If you have $150,000+ to spend on a car, you're a very unusual, and important client. If Ferrari or any other exotic car company were to use that information in a way that angered a Ferrari owner (they stick together like glue), Ferrari would be hit extremely hard economically.

It's pretty simple: If you have a very small niche market, you must do everything possible not alienate your clientelle or your business will fold. With 50 years of success under their belt (and some folly), I'm sure Ferrari understands this well.

[falcongtho3]

You are very correct in your assesment of Ferrari and their clientele. My only point was that the technology exists and is in use that could easily be abused to take a peak into an owners 'habits', and then some...

[Unit 5302]

Originally posted by falcongtho3
You are very correct in your assesment of Ferrari and their clientele. My only point was that the technology exists and is in use that could easily be abused to take a peak into an owners 'habits', and then some...

Couldn't agree more with you, and that's really why this thread was started, too. The technology out there exists to track your every location with a cell phone, track your cars location with it's computer, and about 1/2 of everything else you do too. Makes you wonder when they'll come out with a toliet flush-o-meter to find out how many times you eat Taco Bell in a week?

[falcongtho3]

I refuse to answer that on the grounds that my Drive-Thru priviliges may be revoked!:THUMBSUP: :D

[rsnider]

Again the government has not seen the forest through the trees! I live in Arizona. The state estimates that 50% of the cars on the road have no insurance. Not to get off on a tangent related to imigration... but every single person I work with has has been involved in an eccident of some kind with an uninsured, unlicensed, unregistered vehicle driven by someone without a drivers license. It has gotten so bad that the police do not even bother taking the person to the station or issuing a ticket. They get a name (false) and a phone number (good luck) and let the person go. I see the police point of view. They have no money, nothing to take to pay for damages, and don't care if they go to jail. They would have to be held in jail for months until trial, because if they are let out they will just go back across the border.

BACK TO THE POINT. If you want to lower insurance premiums, forget the expensive digital toys... just enforce the existing laws. But unfortunately it's easier (and more politically correct) to go after those of us who 99.99% of the time follow the letter of the law.

[Verk]

QUOTE: "It would take very little modification to build in a system through a GPS to track your car's position and speed at all times. From that it could simply report back to a police system, and you could be issued tickets without ever seeing an officer."

I guess anything is possible however, it seems to me they (the police) would have to place YOU in the car at the time.

Just because a computer located in your car indicated the car was speeding at some previous point in time does not place you in the car at that time. You could have let a friend drive it, your wife, your kid....etc.

[falcongtho3]

A less sophisiticated version of this already haunts our roadways. It's called PhotoRadar. A camera is set up with a radar gun preset to a certain speed, go over that speed and you get photographed. A few days later the ticket comes to you in the mail. It's a big deal in the UK, but the courts here have had a stuggle with various issues involved. There is also the same set up with traffic lights and people either jumping the light or running the light, but the result is the same. A lovely picture and appropriate ticket in you mailbox in only a few days. Big Brother? You betcha!

[rsnider]

I live in Phoenix Az. Two of our neighboring cities have both red light and speeding types of traffic camera's. (Glendale and Paradise Valley). For a year or so they were fought in court because of legislation that said a ticket could not be mailed... it must be handed to you personally. The law has since been changed and they CAN mail you a ticket.

[Verk]

Originally posted by rsnider
I live in Phoenix Az. Two of our neighboring cities have both red light and speeding types of traffic camera's. (Glendale and Paradise Valley). For a year or so they were fought in court because of legislation that said a ticket could not be mailed... it must be handed to you personally. The law has since been changed and they CAN mail you a ticket.

Okay, but I always thought it was the person driving who was responsible for the traffic infraction and got the ticket not the car.

The camera takes a picture of the license plate but again....what if you were not the one driving the car??

If more than one person has legal access to your car it doesn't mean you were driving it at the time. Seems to me the burden of proof would have to be on the state that you were in fact the one driving the car when the infraction was recorded. But then again.....maybe I'm all wet on this issue. At any rate, I'll shut up and sit down. :D

[03Mach1Chick]

When I took mine in for a blown up clutch and damaged transmission they could no prove it was due to abusive driving, so I think so some extent the PCM can read certain things, but not how hard you drive the car. They could not even pick up the RPM at which the clutch blew up at.

[rsnider]

We have two tangent conversations going?

Photo-radar takes a split frame of the vehicle. One of the back of the car w/license plate. And one of the driver. Dont ask me how they do it but the picture of the driver is so clear it looks like there is no windshield at all? I've been told that because the old units did not prove where your vehicle was in the intersection, they've added another frame where it shows your vehicle in the intersection and the light in the same picture? I've not seen one of the new citations? Once in a while someone will post their picture taken by the machine and they are giving the camera the finger! The last great act of defiance (before you pay the fine).

[Unit 5302]

Actually, the law here in Minnesota is that you are responsible for your own car. Many insurance company policies forbid anybody but the policy owners and the approved drivers on that policy from driving the vehicle.

So if you use the argument it may have been somebody else driving your car, you would still be responsible for the car.

One of the major problems in Phoenix, and Mesa isn't really over whether or not they can prove it was the actual ticketed person behind the wheel, it is because the camera builders (Lockheed Martin) had the stoplight timing switched to 3sec delay from 4sec. That meant normal people trying to cross through what in every instance should be a yellow light, actually wound up running it. Lockheed received royalties from each of those tickets, and tickets absolutely skyrocketed. The city, under extensive political pressure, backed down on the delay rule, and tickets plummetted. Since Lockheed Martin was no longer making tons of money on the camera's they were basically giving the city to use, a new contract had to be re-written. Now Lockheed receives nearly 100% of the royalties for every ticket issued.

http://www.freedom.gov/auto/news/truth.asp

http://www.freedom.gov/auto/news/truth.asp

I agree with the concept uninsured motorists are a major problem, but I'm not sure how to deal with them, either. I feel the vehicle should be impounded immediately (regardless of condition), sold, and the proceeds from the sale should go to cover the damages to the other party. If there is any left over, it can go back to the former owner of the car. Still the problem is many people driving without insurance aren't exactly driving Mach 1's, if you know what I mean. Perhaps seizing all their personal property immediately would be better? Don't know, but it's high time uninsured motorists start feeling some major pain. Maybe a workhouse where their hourly wages go to paying back a loan granted from a bank to cover the damages, and they are required to stay there, working their butt off until the debt is paid?

[FordFanForever]

Here is what I have been told by some people. And maybe one of our resident lawyers have an opinion on this subject.

I have been told alot of these photo tickets can be beaten do to the fact YOU (person being accused) has the right to question his accuser. Now I realise this probably varies from state to state.

[Unit 5302]

9 of 10 times stopping in and talking to an arraignment officer will get the true result you want. Nothing on the insurance record. Though I'm not a fan of paying $100 for a normal traffic ticket here, I will do it if it doesn't go on my insurance record.

There are tons of ways to get out of tickets, but from what I've seen in court, judges have no familiarity with traffic laws, and neither do police officers or prosecutors. You can argue until you're blue in the face, but unless you have the law book in front of you that you can show them, you won't make much headway...

[Low Drag]

Well, since I started this post it has gotten a little off topic, but I like where it has gone. Since everyone has started talking about all the automated ticket systems, I feel compelled to add my thoughts.

I have to begin by confessing to the fact that I'm a cop. I also have to say that I haven't written a speeding ticket in more than 3 and a half years. I can't even remember the last time I've written someone something other than a warning with the exception for certain things, mostly stuff you could go to jail for.

Now for my thoughts on cameras and tickets. Plain and simple, I think this whole system sucks. First of all, a lot of people get down on police because of the perception that they are revenue generators, and rightfully so in many cases. That's one of the reasons I don't write tickets except in extreme situations. I'm here to enforce criminal laws not generate money for the state. I'm just lucky enough to work for a department that does not push this issue, however many do under the pretense that they are protecting the public. Total BS.

Cameras do nothing but enforce this image. Also, the big selling point of these systems was that they were supposed to cut down on accidents. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is no reliable data to show that they do. In fact the opposite is true in some cases. In intersections that are widely known to have these systems accident rates have gone up in some cases, probably because of people slamming on the brakes to avoid a ticket.

Another point is the fact that the systems gets changed to allow these tickets to be legal. If a state has laws that conflict with the issuing of these tickets, then the local municipality will just create a city charge that makes it all legal like. From what I've heard, most places that do this basically make it an guilty until proven innocent type of thing. If your car is seen running the light, either be prepared to pay the fine or snitch on whoever did it. Now tell me that this is anything other than revenue generation. I think everyone here already pays enough in taxes and hidden fees without having to put up with big brother crap like this hiding behind the false pretenses of public safety.

I'm done, just my 2 cents.

[Walt]

Originally posted by rsnider
I've been told that because the old units did not prove where your vehicle was in the intersection, they've added another frame where it shows your vehicle in the intersection and the light in the same picture?

Are we talking about two different things? There is photo-radar which is for speeding, and photo-red-light which is for people running red lights. Since you mention an intersection, and a light, I assume you are talking about the photo-red-light situation.

The problem to date, and why it has been struck down in Appeal Courts, is that it has turned out that these are revenue generators and not for public safety. It has turned out that at least a few places where these installed, also modified the traffic light such that the "yellow time" is very, very short. In the order of a small fraction of a second.

Basically, for all practical purposes, these traffic lights go directly from green to red. You can enter the intersection with the light green, while you are in the intersection it quickly turns red and snaps a picture.

[Walt]

Originally posted by Low Drag
First of all, a lot of people get down on police because of the perception that they are revenue generators, and rightfully so in many cases. That's one of the reasons I don't write tickets except in extreme situations. I'm here to enforce criminal laws not generate money for the state.

:THUMBSUP: